Jack and Jill.....or Jack and Bill?

With baited breath, citizens of every state await a decision on the headlining topic of same sex marriage. The constitutionality of gay marriage is under fire again. DOMA, the defense of marriage act, technically established marriage to be between two individuals of opposite sex. Enacted in 1996, this is simply the attempt to dictate the definition of “normal” and flailing attempt to reassure themselves of protection of traditional family values. Same sex couples enjoy the commitment, love, intimacy and companionship as much as any opposite sex couple. Our culture has come to accept diversity-why is this any different?

The constitution is a shield of protection for many debates. The holy political bible of our country does not define marriage-gay or straight. It was left to the states to include and establish in their own constitution. It seems to me it leans more heavily on the side of social, moral and most of all personal, conflict.

Same sex couples are in the hot seat for wanting, and deserving, the same rights and responsibilities of a “traditional” marital union. Couples who are “living in sin”, AKA cohabitation, are afforded more privileges and acknowledgement than a gay couple willing to seek a legal one. In 1976, a California gay activist Tom Brougham proposed and won a new term of relationship-Domestic Partnership. This was defined as a legal or interpersonal relationship between individuals who live together and share domestic life but not joined in marriage or civil union. It continued to evolve to include and hold the partners accountable for joint property, children, alimony, palimony, etc.-all involved in a heterosexual divorce. Progress? Yes. Then straight couples argued-this applies to us too! Well, isn’t that only fair? In all fairness, since we took the concept and ran with it to afford cohabitating opposite sex couples that ability to obtain insurance benefits, stakes in personal property and rights to their offspring, then we need to reciprocate and make legal marriage for same sex couples. What’s good for a goose is good for two ganders.

Oh, what will become of our family values? The real question is what hasn’t?! America’s divorce rate amongst officially recognized marriage is at an average 50 percent. I personally know more single parents or divorced couples than those successfully married for an appreciable length of time. Turn on MTV- 16 & pregnant, Teen Mom, and Engaged & underage glamourized unconventional family archetypes. These are better examples of “normal” or healthy than a happily married gay couple holding full time employment, paying their taxes, and attending church every Sunday? I won’t even elaborate on Honey Boo-Boo, whose own mother sits sinfully in gluttony and whelped her offspring from three different fathers-none of whom she has ever been married to.

What about the children? (Gasp). Families are founded in love, commitment and security-all values any couple can deliver, regardless of sexuality. The American Academy of Pediatrics released their new policy on March 13, 2013 citing research that has revealed parental sexual orientation has no effect on a child’s development. It states that two parent homes best provide a nurturing, financially and emotionally stable environment-the recipe for successful childrearing. This group of distinguished professionals align themselves with the already pro-gay marriage group AMA (American Medical Association). The definition of family has already evolved from the 1950’s Good Housekeeping version of the nuclear family to one that includes single parents or grandparents raising their own grandchildren.

Denying same sex marriage removes not only the perks but responsibilities granted through the legally acknowledged marriage. Marital right is human-not straight or gay. Marriage makes each spouse accountable to the other. Children of a gay marriage could be afforded child support while protecting the non-custodial parent's right to visitation. Let’s even out the playing field.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, often referred to as the key vote, refers to this situation as “unchartered waters.” Haven’t we been there before and it not be the ultimate demise of our society (segregation/integration, women’s rights)? So when asked who takes these two women/men to lawfully wedded wives/husbands…..I DO.

There must be a mirror in my pants cuz Congress can see themselves in them....

Contrary to popular belief, it is an African proverb that says, “It takes a village to raise a child.” (Not an original work by Hillary.) Birth control=Government shutdown?This blog addresses the reduction and or elimination of funding for family planning and reproductive services using the guise saving the nation from financial meltdown. It began state by state and with changes already emerging from Obamacare, bills are creeping in on a congressional level. It is no secret that certain religiously affiliated health care systems already restrict coverage for family planning and sterilization to their own employees and families. Taking away funds from low cost or free services will result in a Federal and State village raising more than one child. The author doesn’t argue morality or pro-anything-the blog speaks in terms the government and a lot of Americans do-money.

Too many women do not seek reproductive care as it is, with no free or affordable options-even less will. I suppose in a skewed way $35.00 a month for birth control and a free or sliding-scale priced preventative pap smear at the local clinic will save our nation from financial disaster. The USDA estimated $20,000 a year PER child average it is costing me alone (and I have two teens-no diapers, formula, ect.) for basics is far more fiscally logical….right? At the risk of sounding a snob, I do not represent the majority of those who will be most affected by these cuts. With less education, less earning potential and lower socioeconomical status- these affected women often end up on the Federal payroll-aka TANF. Again, cheaper? In seeking methods of family planning, female patients open themselves up for even broader education on their body and how to care for it. Clinics who will reel from their budgets being cut or even eliminated, offer more than just abortions and birth control, they provide information on women’s health issues, sexually transmitted diseases and in some cases counseling. If I sit and think too much-my own government would rather that I be gun-less, with the rise in unemployment expected with sequestration, barefoot and now pregnant all the time too? I’ll make Congress a deal-they stay outta my uterus and I’ll stay out of theirs